Nasa finds sea ice decline driving rise in Arctic air pollutants

Mar 02, 2012

Bromine explosion on March 13, 2008 across the western Northwest Territories in Canada looking toward the Mackenzie Mountains at the horizon, which prevented the bromine from crossing over into Alaska. Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/University of Bremen

(PhysOrg.com) -- Drastic reductions in Arctic sea ice in the last decade may be intensifying the chemical release of bromine into the atmosphere, resulting in ground-level ozone depletion and the deposit of toxic mercury in the Arctic, according to a new NASA-led study.

The connection between changes in the Arctic Ocean's ice cover and bromine chemical processes is determined by the interaction between the salt in sea ice, frigid temperatures and sunlight. When these mix, the salty ice releases bromine into the air and starts a cascade of chemical reactions called a "bromine explosion." These reactions rapidly create more molecules of bromine monoxide in the atmosphere. Bromine then reacts with a gaseous form of mercury, turning it into a pollutant that falls to Earth's surface.

Bromine also can remove ozone from the lowest layer of the atmosphere, the troposphere. Despite ozone's beneficial role blocking harmful radiation in the stratosphere, ozone is a pollutant in the ground-level troposphere.

A team from the United States, Canada, Germany, and the United Kingdom, led by Son Nghiem of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., produced the study, which has been accepted for publication in the Journal of Geophysical Research- Atmospheres. The team combined data from six NASA, European Space Agency and Canadian Space Agency satellites, field observations and a model of how air moves in the atmosphere to link Arctic sea ice changes to bromine explosions over the Beaufort Sea, extending to the Amundsen Gulf in the Canadian Arctic.

"Shrinking summer sea ice has drawn much attention to exploiting Arctic resources and improving maritime trading routes," Nghiem said. "But the change in sea ice composition also has impacts on the environment. Changing conditions in the Arctic might increase bromine explosions in the future."

Bromine explosion observed by scientists at the University of Bremen on March 14, 2008 over Alaska and the Beaufort Sea (upper panel), using data from the German Aerospace Center (DLR)-developed Global Ozone Monitoring Experiment-2 (GOME-2) instrument aboard the European Organization for the Exploitation of Meterological Satellites (EUMETSAT) MetOp-A satellite. The data reveal a vortex (spiral) pattern on the left side of the image. The lower panel shows sea ice cover at the time, as measured by NASA’s QuikScat spacecraft. Perennial ice is shown in white, while salty seasonal ice is depicted in dark blue. The distribution of bromine conforms to the cold rising air patterns at the time, including the vortex, and traces the transport of bromine in the troposphere, mostly at altitudes less than 500 meters. Image credit: NASA-JPL/Caltech/University of Bremen/University of Washington

The study was undertaken to better understand the fundamental nature of bromine explosions, which first were observed in the Canadian Arctic more than two decades ago. The team of scientists wanted to find if the explosions occur in the troposphere or higher in the stratosphere.

Nghiem's team used the topography of mountain ranges in Alaska and Canada as a "ruler" to measure the altitude at which the explosions took place. In the spring of 2008, satellites detected increased concentrations of bromine, which were associated with a decrease of gaseous mercury and ozone. After the researchers verified the satellite observations with field measurements, they used an atmospheric model to study how the wind transported the bromine plumes across the Arctic.

The model, together with satellite observations, showed the Alaskan Brooks Range and the Canadian Richardson and Mackenzie mountains stopped bromine from moving into Alaska's interior. Since most of these mountains are lower than 6,560 feet (2,000 meters), the researchers determined the bromine explosion was confined to the lower troposphere.

"If the bromine explosion had been in the stratosphere, 5 miles [8 kilometers] or higher above the ground, the mountains would not have been able to stop it and the bromine would have been transported inland," Nghiem said.

After the researchers found that bromine explosions occur in the lowest level of the atmosphere, they could relate their origin to sources on the surface. Their model, tracing air rising from the salty ice, tied the bromine releases to recent changes in Arctic sea ice that have led to a much saltier sea ice surface.

In March 2008, the extent of year-round perennial sea ice eclipsed the 50-year record low set in March 2007, shrinking by 386,100 square miles (one million square kilometers) -- an area the size of Texas and Arizona combined. Seasonal ice, which forms over the winter when seawater freezes, now occupies the space of the lost perennial ice. This younger ice is much saltier than its older counterpart because it has not had time to undergo processes that drain its sea salts. It also contains more frost flowers -- clumps of ice crystals up to four times saltier than ocean waters -- providing more salt sources to fuel bromine releases.

Nghiem said if sea ice continues to be dominated by younger saltier ice, and Arctic extreme cold spells occur more often, bromine explosions are likely to increase in the future.

Nghiem is leading an Arctic field campaign this month that will provide new insights into bromine explosions and their impacts. NASA's Bromine, Ozone, and Mercury Experiment (BROMEX) involves international contributions by more than 20 organizations.

Related Stories

NASA data shows that Arctic perennial sea ice, which normally survives the summer melt season and remains year-round, shrunk abruptly by 14 percent between 2004 and 2005. According to researchers, the loss of perennial ice ...

Using data from the satellite-based MIPAS and GOME-2 instruments, scientists have for the first time detected important bromine species in the atmosphere. These new measurements will help scientists to better understand sources ...

Scientists tracking the annual maximum extent of Arctic sea ice said that 2011 was among the lowest ice extents measured since satellites began collecting the data in 1979. Using satellites to track Arctic ice and comparing ...

Scientists at NSIDC announced that March 2006 shows the lowest Arctic winter sea ice extent since the beginning of the satellite record in 1979 (see Figures 1 and 2). Sea ice extent, or the area of ocean that ...

Scientists from the University of Colorado at Boulder's National Snow and Ice Data Center said today that the extent of Arctic sea ice appears to have reached its minimum for 2007 on Sept. 16, shattering all previous lows ...

Recommended for you

In their open-access paper for Geology, Kimberly Genareau and colleagues propose, for the first time, a mechanism for the generation of glass spherules in geologic deposits through the occurrence of volcan ...

An analysis of buildings tagged red and yellow by structural engineers after the August 2014 earthquake in Napa links pre-1950 buildings and the underlying sedimentary basin to the greatest shaking damage, ...

As everyone who lives in the San Francisco Bay Area knows, the Earth moves under our feet. But what about the stresses that cause earthquakes? How much is known about them? Until now, our understanding of ...

(Phys.org)—A trio of researchers with the Indian Institute of Science has found, via computer simulation, that deforestation in one part of the world can impact rainfall patterns in another. In their paper ...

It's no surprise that Arctic sea ice is thinning. What is new is just how long, how steadily, and how much it has declined. University of Washington researchers compiled modern and historic measurements to ...

User comments : 99

But there is a link to a Heartland Institute web site in the advertising space at the top of this article that claims that the Arctic ice cap is not melting and it's all part of the "fake gate" conspiracy against them and the American People, by Radical Science.

I guess Antony Watts (a nobody who runs a popular anti-science blog) and who has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Libertarian Heartland Institute for advancing their anti-science goals, is right when he supports their claims with cherry picked data and mindless inuendo.

Perhaps the Heartland Institute is right, the world is really cooling, and as they say on their various web sites, smoking isn't dangerous and is a lifestyle choice that children should think carefully about.

One more note. I actually remember when the Skate did make some winter journeys to the pole. However, the reports at the time had her surfacing through the ice. As for open spots, the ice is not homogeneous so I would expect for there to be spots you could come up through. If I recall correctly, they looked at the ice thickness with sonar and were able to decide where to punch up. Surfacing through ice is still done.

Oh give me a break! Summer of 58 or Winter of 59 big deal. I will guarantee that if the North Pole ever went ice free this summer it would be an "Unprecedented" catastrophe and become an unquestionable proof that CO2 will soon end the world as we know it.

As far as the Sea Ice data, ask the Greenland Climate Research Center the reason for the time frame. Perhaps they also have been paid off by "Big Business".

So - an international team of scientists does research - that is going to be published in a peer reviewed journal. And MR166 posts a picture of a submarine to refute this research. If you go back to the Naval web site - the legend on the picture reads - "taken in summer, perhaps in August 1958". MR166 - what exactly is the point u r making? Does this picture taken "perhaps in August 1958" refute the research being reported here?

And, February global temperature is -.12C below 0.Oh shock - you r using WhatsUpWithThat for your cherry picked data again - they don't have a political agenda do they? Try looking at a full set of data - instead of picking the one that fits your agenda. Hey - here's an idea - go back to the original data - the full data set http://data.giss....aphs_v3/ Wow - does not quite fit your hypothesis now....

"You really think my country would invest billions in fighting global warming since a decade if it was not real?"

90% of the western world is bankrupt due to poor financial decisions and crony capitalism. So unless you are lucky enough to live in that 10% the answer would have to be yes and then I am sure that the investment would be minimal not billions.

The advertising agencies behind the various denialist movements have made it a goal to have at least one of their representatives on every major website employed to keep their denialist message in public view.

In September 2008, the Delta commission presided by Dutch politician Cees Veerman advised in a report that the Netherlands would need a massive new building program to strengthen the country's water defenses against the anticipated effects of global warming for the next 190 years. This commission was created in September 2007 after the damage caused by Hurricane Katrina to New Orleans prompted reflection and preparations. Those included drawing up worst-case scenarios for evacuations. The plans included more than 100 billion, or $144 billion, in new spending through the year 2100 for measures, such as broadening coastal dunes and strengthening sea and river dikes.

Look VD the bottom line is that the planet has been warming for the past 18,000 years. Sea ice is hugely affected by ocean current oscillations so a 10% anomaly is not unheard of. The real argument is whether or not man's contribution to the CO2 levels are significant or not. That my man is FAR from certain. CO2 increases farm yields and allows plants to grow with less water. Lastly, 1 degree of cooling will kill more people than 1 degree of warming.

Look VD the bottom line is that the planet has been warming for the past 18,000 years. Sea ice is hugely affected by ocean current oscillations so a 10% anomaly is not unheard of. The real argument is whether or not man's contribution to the CO2 levels are significant or not. That my man is FAR from certain. CO2 increases farm yields and allows plants to grow with less water. Lastly, 1 degree of cooling will kill more people than 1 degree of warming.

Far from certain? In every warming event prior to man, CO2 followed warming, not this time. Pretty easy to prove when 270PPM was the highest level in the last million years, until we started burning fossil fuels....390 PPM and rising. Your 1 degree either way would really depend on where the maximum/minimum rise or fall took place when relating to how the human race would be affected.

VD is an end of the worlder. He and his ilk wants the Little Ice Age to come back and kill billions.

I don't.

Actually, we would like the planet and humanity to have a less bleak future than our current levels of consumption and emission will leave for future generations. The level of ignorance displayed by the "everything's just fine, business as usual" mentality is what will wind up killing billions. Watching you fumble your way through debate after debate about the subject of climate change, posting links which posess content that disproves the points you are trying argue, although superficially amusing, in the end just underscores the difficulty intelligent people with a conscience will have in affecting the changes towards sustainability.

The last few years have been dominated by La-Nina cooling of the pacific which have kept global average temperatures artificially low.

Scientists have calculated that without this temporary cooling effect - and several other less significant temporary effects currently at work, global average temperatures have continued to rise.

One anthropogenic effect that is cooling the earth is the large emissions of particulates from Chinese coal fired power plants.

This is the same effect that caused to a great extent the reductions in global temperatures seen from 1940 to 1976.

1960 to 1976 produced a similar "plateau", as did 1900 to 1920, etc.

This will soon change.

"Unfortunately for us, the last few years have been no warmer than the 42/44 peak indicating we are in the early stage of a 35 year or longer cooling period like the one from 1944 to 1979." - ParkerTard

VD it is amazing how the "True Believers", like your self, can produce more hockey sticks than the NHL. One of Michael Mann's biggest concerns was trying to hide the temperatures thru out the MWP so as not to dilute the credibility of his scam.

Greenland was settled by the Vikings as a farming community during that time and it is when people think they discovered NA. Recently a farmer was discovered there in what is NOW permafrost. I seriously doubt that the Vikings would have tried to bury someone in permafrost. England was growing citrus fruits during that time.

Can you even fathom the consequences of an MWP event starting today under the current circumstances? The fact that the MWP happened without any help from the human race should be a giant red flag considering what we are witnessing currently. If the 15 or so blatantly clear signs of global climate change are being caused by natural variability (ie: the 15 different drivers that denialists attribute to each example individually), then stacking that on top on man made forcings really does forecast doom and gloom for the not to distant future.

Look at the bright side. Man has use almost 50% of the easily available hydrocarbons, so how much more CO2 can he really create. Unless we conserve and find alternate sources of cost effective energy soon ( 2 generations ) society will revert back to the standards of living prevalent in the 1800s!

Energy conservation and AGW do NOT share common goals. AGW is about higher taxes and increasing government power over the individual and energy conservation/ development of new power sources is about Energy Return on Energy Invested or ERoEI.

"By the year 1000 the Viking societies numbered some 3,000 inhabitants on 300-400 farms. The Viking society survived for 500 years. The reason for its disappearance remains a great mystery, but a colder climate, conflicts with the Inuit people, European pirates, overgrazing and bouts of plague have all been put forward as possible causes of its demise."

I really doubt that they were importing grains or living on meat alone.

A study by scientists at Stanford University found that a 2 degree Celsius increase in temperature would reduce the wheat-growing season by nine days and cut yields by up to 20 percent. After looking at nine years of data on wheat performance in northern India, the researchers concluded that extreme heat causes the plant to age faster,

"As the archaeologists dug through the permafrost and removed the windblown glacial sand that filled the rooms, they found fragments of looms and cloth. Scattered about were other household belongings, including an iron knife, whetstones, soapstone vessels, and a double-edged comb. Whoever lived here departed so hurriedly that they left behind iron and caribou antler arrows, weapons needed for survival in this harsh country, medieval Europe's farthest frontier. What drove the occupants away? Where did they go? "

Notice how the archaeologists had to dig through permafrost to uncover the dwellings. Does suggest to you that Greenland might have been warmer then than it is today?

At the hight of the MWP southern Greenland was between 1 to 1.5 c warmer than it is was in the late twentieth century. So what does that prove? It does not prove that globally temperatures were that warm.

"Notice how the archaeologists had to dig through permafrost to uncover the dwellings. Does suggest to you that Greenland might have been warmer then than it is today?"

They could have held off for a few years and they wouldn't have had to...

@NP - Good luck with that cooling forecast, the odds you would get in Vegas against that are so good you should go put a 10 spot on it....although they will thank you for your money and ask you if you need medical attention. As a matter of fact, coming into the height of a solar maximum with an El nino on the way...I'll take the bet and give you 10 to one odds, we can use 2011 as our starting point.

Look Steve there is no doubt that we are somewhat near the temperatures of the MWP. Is that a problem? That period was one of great prosperity in Europe until it transitioned into cooling. If we add another degree to that there is no doubt that some locations would suffer but Canada and Russia would have better yields and more than make up the difference. The models that are the basis for the man made component of this change are highly suspect. Until we find rational and economically sound sources of energy to replace hydrocarbons there is not really much that can be done without causing millions to starve.

So Steve, I take it your solution is cap and trade, one world government and ceding your wealth and liberties to the same nations and corporations that have bankrupted the world. What exactly is your solution to the energy crisis? Is it solar, is it wind or perhaps there is some other form of power that you are aware of that does not require huge government subsidies to be viable? BTW don't bother to mention any "subsidies" that the oil and gas industries receive from the government. They pay more taxes, net of subsidies, to the government than any other industry. Wind and Solar companies are net receivers of taxes and subsidies.

A recent study concluded Greenland was as warm or warmer in the 1930's and 40's and the rate of warming from 1920-1930 was about 50% higher than the warming from 1995-2005. One 2005 study found Greenland gaining ice in the interior higher elevations and thinning ice at the lower elevations.

World all wheat (including durum) production for 2010-2011 decreased by 35 Mt from 2009-2010 to 647.6 Mt. The decrease in production is due to lower yields and a decrease in the harvested area. The sharpest decrease in production, at 20.2 Mt, was in Russia because of drought. World supply decreased by 4.9 Mt to 844.9 Mt as higher carry in stocks offset most of the decrease in production. World use is expected to increase by 10.5 Mt to 663 Mt with growth in both the food and feed markets."

Lindzen receives funding from the Libertarian propaganda organization calling itself the CATO Institute. CATO operates in an analogous manner to the Heritage Foundation and has many of the same despicable corporate funders.

I have never encountered a Libertarian who wasn't a congenital and perpetual liar. Lindzen is no exception to that rule.

The current position of the glacier indicates it was WARMER during the MWP (the period before the LIA), otherwise how could trees of that age have grown there.

The glacier is still retreating which indicates that it is warmer now than at the previous minimum extent.

With regard to the medieval period (5th to the 16th century) nowhere had a constant climate. The warmest period in Patagonia was at the beginning of the 15th century, long after the peak temperature in Greenland at the start of the 11th century.

"In December 2011, a new study was published. "The study was presented by glaciologist and CECs researcher Andrés Rivera, who focused his investigation on changes in the glacier between February 2010 and January 2011. Using a series of 1,445 photos taken throughout this period, scientists found that the glacier shrank roughly 82 feet each day, receding more than half a mile in the course of the year."

"If the furthest retreat indicates temperature then it was warmer in the past." - ParkerTard

While the current retreat is known to be caused by heating, retreats can be caused by both heating or a lack of snowfall due to changes in wind currents, dryer air overflowing the mountain, etc.

"The USDA projected that domestic wheat supplies will total 957 million bushels at the end of 2012-2013, 13% more than in 2011-2012, while the EU predicted ending stocks will rise 40% to 15 million tons."

"The presence of old growth forest during those dates indicates that Glaciar Jorge Montt was upvalley of its present position before the commonly recognized Little Ice Age (LIA) period in Patagonia."

Translation for VD followers:

The current position of the glacier indicates it was WARMER during the MWP (the period before the LIA), otherwise how could trees of that age have grown there.

That would only be if the glacier has reached the extent of it's retreat...it hasn't. As far as your wheat, MR166's comment was about Canada and Russia, not the US. Not to mention, your attempting to argue using projected numbers, not recorded ones.

Russia did have a bad harvest due to the oppressive heat this summer and will have a bad Spring harvest due to the excessive snow and cold. That is what is known as weather. Unless accompanied by drought, 1 degree of warming would help northern crop production whereas 1 degree of cooling would delay planting to the point of crop failure due to a shortened growing season. Don't try to say that 1 degree of heating HAS to create droughts in the northern latitudes since there is no real proof of that other than perhaps some computer climate models created by Chicken Little under some government sponsorship where the outcome was predetermined.

Please sign in to add a comment.
Registration is free, and takes less than a minute.
Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.

Javascript is currently disabled in your web browser. For full site functionality, it is necessary to enable Javascript.
In order to enable it, please see these instructions.